Greg Sargent:
But [Megyn] Kelly is absolutely right to note, in the context of the birthright citizenship debate, that Trump has answered questions “explicitly,” while Cruz won’t. This illustrates, once again, that Trump’s immigration plan, if you can call it that, has had the effect of making GOP evasions on the overall immigration issue much harder to sustain.
The Onion, from 2014. You can guess the reference.
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens
Greg Sargent:
So here’s a friendly reminder: this whole Trump mess probably could have been avoided. If Republicans had simply held votes on immigration reform in 2013 or in early 2014, it probably would have passed. That likely would have made it harder for Trump-ism to take hold to the degree it has so far.
Before you ridicule me for suggesting that Republicans would be better off today if they had simply done what I wanted them to do — pass immigration reform — please recall that GOP leaders themselves said at the time that they wanted to pass immigration reform. Even reform that included a path to legalization for the 11 million.
More politics and policy below the fold.
Glenn Greenwald:
Jorge Ramos, the influential anchor of Univision and an American immigrant from Mexico, has been denouncing Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric. Yesterday at a Trump press conference in Iowa, Ramos stood and questioned Trump on his immigration views. Trump at first ignored him, then scolded him for speaking without being called on and repeatedly ordered him to “sit down,” then told him: “Go back to Univision.” When Ramos refused to sit down and shut up as ordered, a Trump bodyguard physically removed him from the room. After the press conference concluded, Ramos returned and again questioned Trump about immigration, with the two mostly talking over each other as Ramos asked Trump about the fundamental flaws in his policy. Afterward, Ramos said: “This is personal. … He’s talking about our parents, our friends, our kids and our babies.”
One might think that in a conflict between a journalist removed from a press conference for asking questions and the politician who had him removed, journalists would side with their fellow journalist. Some are. But many American journalists have seized on the incident to denounce Ramos for the crime of having opinions and even suggesting that he’s not really acting as a journalist at all.
Just think of the contrast between the press circling the wagons around
Major Garrett and
dissing Jorge Ramos.
Well, here's a Voxspainer on why:
Ramos is arguably the most influential journalist in the Spanish-language press, if not the most influential Latino journalist period. So anything he does is going to matter to a certain segment of Latinos, and, increasingly, he's getting the attention of the mainstream media ecosystem as well. But a lot of traditional political journalists beginning to pay attention to Jorge Ramos are surprised or put off by what they find. His style — and his conception (shared with a lot of other Spanish-language journalists and media outlets) of what journalism ought to be — differs from the traditional values of political journalism. This isn't the first time Ramos has confronted a politician, and it won't be the last, but the confrontation with Trump is bringing the culture clash between his vision of journalism and traditional journalistic "objectivity" to the surface.
Ronald Brownstein:
Trump is proposing more sweeping change than the 1996 platform [Presidential candidate Bob] Dole repudiated.
The businessman argues that the 14th Amendment does not, in fact, guarantee citizenship to the estimated 4.5 million U.S. children born of undocumented immigrants; if the courts agreed, that presumably would make those children subject to the deportation he pledges to pursue against all those here illegally.
But in responding to Trump, the 2016 Republicans have wavered far more than Dole did. About half of the GOP field (including Ted Cruz, Rick Santorum, and Ben Carson) has also endorsed ending birthright citizenship, at least prospectively. Scott Walker quickly embraced the idea before backpedaling to reject it. Even the two candidates who most forthrightly rejected Trump's call could not completely escape his gravitational pull.
Just for fun from
Bloomberg on Gov. Toast:
A super-PAC called Stop Chris Christie is shutting down, saying the New Jersey governor’s campaign for the Republican presidential nomination is so underwhelming that opposition is no longer necessary.
“We looked at the polls and all the indicators seem to be showing that Chris Christie is going nowhere fast,” Tom Bjorklund, treasurer of the political-action committee, said in interview. “It’s always difficult to make the case for stopping someone who isn’t doing well.”
HuffPost Latino Voices:
Hate-Group Watchdog: Trump Has 'White Nationalist Positions'
"When he calls Mexicans rapists and murderers, he is dog-whistling in a very clear way to this far-right constituency."
HuffPost:
Businessman Donald Trump has told several top Republicans that he will swear off the possibility of an independent bid and commit to running his presidential campaign under the party's banner, according to several sources.
Such a move could endear Trump further to Republican voters who have remained skeptical about his allegiance to a political party he joined relatively recently. Trump had drawn sharp criticism from GOP leaders concerned that a third party bid would effectively guarantee a Democratic win in the general election.
Politico has the bullshit take of the day:
The nuclear agreement with Iran is becoming an early campaign flash point in the battle for Senate control in 2016, fueling Republican attacks and creating divisions in contested Democratic primaries ahead of critical votes in Congress next month.
It’s a rare instance of foreign policy driving the debate in congressional races — in an off year, no less — and a potential preview of things to come if the Iran pact continues to generate heat into next year. Republicans are trying to portray Democrats backing the deal as weak on Israel and national defense. And some Democratic hopefuls are going after opponents for not taking a stand.
Presidential years are about the economy, not foreign policy. Republicans can dream otherwise, as dutifully reported by Politico, but never forget 2006 and security ads that lost elections (this from Nancy Johnson-R, CT-05):
Jamelle Bouie on another loser:
[Scott] Walker, put simply, appears tailor-made for a Republican presidential primary—an ideal blend of mainstream experience and conservative politics. But in his months as a presidential candidate, Walker hasn’t been the dark horse we expected—the strongest challenger to Jeb Bush’s dynastic candidacy. He’s been, instead, a non-presence. He doesn’t flicker, let alone catch fire, and when it comes to issues and answering voters, the Wisconsin governor has been awkward, clumsy, and flat-footed. Yes, he has money and yes, he has an organization. But that doesn’t make up for skill, or a lack thereof. So far, he just isn’t good, and it shows.